Many people have watched and enjoyed William F. Buckley Jr. and Noam Chomsky via youtube. Instead of posting a link, I shall trust that you the reader can find one of many copies on youtube of their "debate".

On one hand you had the 20th century's most eloquent, outspoken critic of statism and military collectivist states. The other man was the 20th century's most eloquent, outspoken critic of colonialism, imperialism, and military intervention.

Buckley of course supplied the personality and showmanship required for television and Chomsky supplied a dry but sharp intellelect. Even forgiving Buckley's showmanship (which seems almost surreal next to Chomsky's stoic presence) and for coming a bit ill-prepared versus the well researched Chomsky, the two had an amazing conversation. Before Buckley left us, I had remarked to myself that you could take their discussion and apply it to today's world aptly. Buckley and Chomsky's talk is one which each of us has within their own mind to some extent when searching their thoughts about America's foreign endeavors.

I was humbled when Chomsky was asked about the video by the Western Standard and had similar thoughts:
What we were talking about then can be transferred to today very easily.  By coincidence, just today an op-ed of mine was distributed by the NY Times syndicate with some comparisons about debate over Vietnam and over Iraq.  Many of the other questions, about the general nature of U.S. foreign policy, are persistent.
Source: The Western Standard

This got me to thinking about everyone's favorite gut-check Chomsky. Reading a Chomsky article can be predictable at times. If you start with the premise that America is wrong and then find a way to work in an East Timor reference then you will find that you too can write like Noam Chomsky. However, America does have to look itself in the mirror in the morning. Noam Chomsky has prevented America from looking itself in a mirror that shows no flaws when it wakes up the morning after an intervention.

Buckley is gone but so is the statism of the Soviet Union. Chomsky is in his twilight years and I don't think anyone will look at America with a straight face and think we are a colonial power. Who will replace the eloquent intellectualism of these men? Ward Churchill is no Noam Chomsky. Do we even need their mantles taken and worn by another?

Military statism is dead. I am not merely talking about the demise of the Soviet Union, but Buckley recognized that the battle was also an intellectual one. It is a battle that was won. Does anyone think America is in danger of being a colonial/imperial power? American doesn't want to keep Iraq. So when we look to find successors for these men, we have to realize that we won't find them. If anyone today took lead of the battle against statism or colonialism, they would find an empty battlefield covered in relics from the 20th century.

The successors of Buckley and Chomsky will be the men who clearly define the new intellectual threats of our day and make us look ourselves in the mirror for the results of when that intellectualism is applied.

I was doing some research on the more remote Caribbean islands. On one map I noticed a tiny island in the mid-east of the Caribbean off the main ridges: Isla Aves

I was fascinated so I looked it up Wikipedia. Mind you, I was looking for remote places to scuba dive. I was looking for hidden jewels in the Caribbean and tropical Atlantic in pursuit of that current less traveled. Most islands in that part of the Caribbean follow the ridge to the east as the tips of underwater hills or mountains breach the surface for air.

From: Isla Aves on Wikipedia
"It is 375 m in length and never more than 50 m in width, and rises 4 m above the sea on a calm day. Mostly sand, a small portion has some scrubby vegetation. It is sometimes completely submerged during hurricanes."

This does not sound promising for a good place to dive.

"For some time the island has been in danger of eroding altogether, and Venezuelan authorities are considering ways to protect it, along with the territorial claims to the Caribbean Sea which radiate from Isla Aves. The impact of Hurricane Allen in the 1980 Atlantic hurricane season divided it into two parts, but accretions of coral have subsequently reunited it. On August 17, 2007, the force of Hurricane Dean severely eroded the island."

Definitely not a good place to dive from. It is barely there at all and sounds like it has no barrier reefs to protect it from surge.

"On June 2, 1978, the Venezuelan Navy set up a scientific naval base named Simón Bolívar on the lee (west) side near the southern tip of the island, constructed as a platform built on stilts partially in the water, which was permanently inhabited by a group of scientists and military personnel.

The Venezuelan military in 2004 expanded the naval base, which was raised on stilts above the water. Several Caribbean island nations, including Dominica, have asserted to the United Nations that Venezuela's claim to an extensive exclusive economic zone of up to 200 nautical miles (370 km) from Isla de Aves is illegal."

So of course, Chavez used this rock barely above sea level to lay claim to 370km of the Caribbean (this rock does not qualify for these territorial claims according to the UN).

I think we can safely conclude from this, that it is definitely not the hidden jewel of the diving world I was looking for.

Chavez uses this rock barely above sea level to lay claim to 370km of the Caribbean (this rock does not qualify for territorial claims according to the UN). I am glad to see that Chavez showcases his anti-imperialist credentials by establishing a base and territorial claims on a lonely sea rock that the tides may well wash away.